Benghazi is more than just tawdry

Sunday

Dec 2, 2012 at 3:15 AM

It is one thing for conservative Republican senators such as Kelly Ayotte and Lindsay Graham to oppose the possible nomination of Susan Rice to succeed Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. But it is quite another when the moderate Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, expresses misgivings, even after a 95-minute closed-door meeting with Rice.

As U.N. ambassador, it was Rice who laid blame for the Benghazi killings on an anti-Muslim video instead of on terrorists.

To quote The Associated Press: “At issue is Rice’s much-maligned explanation for the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. In a series of talk show appearances, Rice blamed the attack on a spontaneous demonstration to an anti-Muslim video rather than terrorism.”

This has led to a parade of questions about what Rice knew, didn’t know or should have known.

“I still have many questions that remain unanswered,” Collins reportedly told the media after the meeting. “I continue to be troubled by the fact that the U.N. ambassador decided to play what was essentially a political role at the height of the contentious presidential election campaign by agreeing to go on the Sunday shows to present the administration’s position.”

For some, Rice has now become the poster child for all that went wrong on Sept. 11, 2012 in Libya. Fair or unfair, she has drawn the fury of those who want to know the whole story of Benghazi. That story is not limited, however, to Rice. There are still questions outstanding as to why the Obama Administration may have ignored security warnings and may have even held back rescue efforts as the consulate came under attack.

“The whole issue of Benghazi has been a tawdry affair,” Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., said to reporters after his 90-minute session with Rice and acting CIA Director Michael Morell, which followed that of Collins.

The editorial board here at Foster’s Daily Democrat would suggest the handling of Benghazi has been more than tawdry. It has been inept at best and murderous at worse. How can the administration have failed to beef up security in Libya and elsewhere on the anniversary of 9/11? How can Rice have the gall to layoff her misstatements on bad intelligence when it now appears there were security warnings beforehand that were ignored by the Obama White House or those delegated with the responsibility to protect U.S. embassies.

It will be unfortunate if the president simply declines to nominate Rice and passes on addressing these and other overriding questions. But that may be in the offing.

When asked after her meeting with Rice if she would help block a nomination, the AP reports Collins stopped short of saying she would join Sens. Graham and Ayotte in that effort. But, in a clear message to the White House, the AP noted, Collins said Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass., would have a smooth path to confirmation if Obama chose him over Rice for the State Department job.

A Kerry nomination would be its own affront, given Kerry’s false accusations before a Senate in 1971 of atrocities by U.S. Armed Forces in Vietnam. There is no doubt a Senate confirmation hearing would revive those words and a war the United States is better off keeping in the rearview mirror of history.

Instead, the time is now to determine what went wrong in Benghazi and why.